Two-judge Bench dismissed a petition seeking restoration of a Civil Review application rejected for default. The Court found no good ground for restoration due to a delay of over 7.5 years without explanation and non-compliance with prior Court orders to remove defects in the stamp report.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2348 of 2015 In
C. REV. 155 of 2007
======================================================
Patna High Court MJC No.2348 of 2015 (2) dt.01-03-2016
2/3
restoration of Civil Review No. 155 of 2007 which was dismissed for default on 29.01.2008 due to non-compliance of peremptory order dated 28.01.2008 passed by this Court.
The Civil Review application was filed with respect to the judgment and order dated 17.07.2007 passed in L.P.A. No. 01 of 1997 by which the appeal was dismissed and the dismissal of writ petition by learned Single Judge was upheld. The Civil Review application was filed on 14.08.2007 with a large number of defects and on account of non- removal of the defects, the matter was placed before the Lawazima Board. On 06.11.2007 no one appeared on behalf of the applicants and four weeks final time was allowed to learned counsel for the applicants to remove the stamp report defect nos. 1 to 5. The said defects were not removed and accordingly, the matter was placed before the Bench of this Court. On 28.01.2008 the Division Bench granted time till the next day, i.e., 29.01.2008 to comply with the order dated 06.11.2007 of the Lawazima Board, failing which the application shall stand rejected without further reference to a Bench. The order was not complied with and accordingly, the Civil Review application was rejected on 29.01.2008.
Thereafter, no steps were taken in the matter by the learned counsel for the petitioners and ultimately the restoration application has been filed on 03.09.2015 after a delay of more than
Patna High Court MJC No.2348 of 2015 (2) dt.01-03-2016
3/3
7½ years and there is no explanation for gross laches on the part of the petitioners in the matter except stating that the case was listed on 28.01.2008 and the same was not marked due to mistake and, therefore, petitioners could not appear on 28.01.2008. No explanation is given as to why the petitioners have not appeared on 06.11.2007 before the Lawazima Board and not complied with the order of the Lawazima Board to remove the stamp report defects nos. 1 to 5 within a period of four weeks. No explanation has also been given as to what steps were taken by the petitioners after filing of the Civil Review application on 14.08.2007 for removing the defects as the stamp report on defects itself was made on 25.08.2007.
In the aforesaid view of the matter, it is evident that no good ground has been shown by the petitioners for restoration of the Civil Review application.
The restoration application is, accordingly, dismissed.
(Ramesh Kumar Datta, J)
U.K./-sudip U
(Sudhir Singh, J)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Civil Review application warranting restoration should be allowed given gross laches and failure to explain the delay of more than 7 years.
Whether the petitioners have shown sufficient cause to justify the restoration of a default order in a Civil Review application.
Shailendra Kumar
Satyendra Kumar
Shailesh Kumar
Sunil Kumar
Lilavati Devi
Sujata Kumari
Ramesh Kumar Datta
Sudhir Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
